Access

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Description:
The official flagship journal of the American Sociological Association (ASA), American Sociological Review (ASR) publishes works of interest to the discipline in general, new theoretical developments, results of research that advance our understanding of fundamental social processes, and important methodological innovations. All areas of sociology are welcome. Emphasis is on exceptional quality and general interest. Published bi-monthly in February, April, June, August, October, and December.

The "moving wall" represents the time period between the last issue
available in JSTOR and the most recently published issue of a journal.
Moving walls are generally represented in years. In rare instances, a
publisher has elected to have a "zero" moving wall, so their current
issues are available in JSTOR shortly after publication.
Note: In calculating the moving wall, the current year is not counted.
For example, if the current year is 2008 and a journal has a 5 year
moving wall, articles from the year 2002 are available.

Terms Related to the Moving Wall

Fixed walls: Journals with no new volumes being added to the archive.

Absorbed: Journals that are combined with another title.

Complete: Journals that are no longer published or that have been
combined with another title.

Abstract

A guide is provided to the proceedings of the Hawthorne experiments, and experimental data are now made readily available. Data from the main experiment (that in the first relay assembly test room at Western Electric) are interpreted statistically for the first time. Quantitative analysis of this quasi experiment is accomplished by time-series multiple regression using nearly five years of data. This analysis demonstrates that experimental variables account for some 90% of the variance in quantity and quality of output, both for the group and for individual workers. Imposition of managerial discipline, economic adversity, and quality of raw materials provide most explanation, obviating the need to draw upon less clearly definable human relations mechanisms. For decades the Hawthorne studies have provided a rationale for humane approaches in the organization of work by suggesting that considerate or participative treatment of workers led to better economic performance. The present analysis suggests, to the contrary, that humanitarian procedures must provide their own justification.